Using Cumulative Impact Assessment as a Smokescreen in New South Wales Alcohol Harm Reduction Laws: A Commentary.

In 2020 the New South Wales Liquor Act was amended to allow the Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority (ILGA) to approve new liquor authorisations in parts of the Sydney CBD otherwise subject to a freeze. The vehicle for this was called Cumulative Impact Assessment (CIA). The Amendment added promotion of business vitality to an established list of considerations previously set out by ILGA in its Guideline (6) on social impact assessment. The strategy set out in a new Guideline (18) appears to use an impartial and objective methodology while advocating reliance on intangible criteria and selective use of data in order to increase applicant chances of success against a rebuttable presumption against approval. While CIA is an established method in other professional areas, its use in the amendment influenced by the industry risks exacerbating alcohol-related harm.

Rational Social Impact Assessment of Alcohol Outlets: Slip Sliding Away.

In 2004 legislators in New South Wales relied on Australia's National Competition Policy to change the reason for determining alcohol outlet approvals from a "needs" to a "harm minimisation" basis. This was predicated on the application of a rational social impact assessment (SIA) process. Within a short time, however, the volume of liquor licence applications began to erode that intention and the delays that applicants encountered placed politicians under pressure to fast-track the process. Subsequent liquor legislation retained the statutory obligation on decision-makers to ensure no overall detrimental social impact associated with the approval of an alcohol outlet licence. However, legislative amendments to the approval process reduced the number and kinds of licences and authorisations to which the social impact test applied and encouraged other shortcuts which undermine the validity of these assessments. The resulting statutory approval system in practice relegates SIA to an exception rather than the rule and has revealed the relative weakness of SIA as a public health safeguard.

Eroding Public Health through Liquor Licensing Decisions.

This article uses the public record to demonstrate the inadequacy of the current liquor licensing decision-making system in New South Wales (NSW) with regard to reducing alcohol-related harm. It describes and compares planning and liquor licensing decision-making systems and examines all decisions regarding applications for new liquor licences published by the NSW Independent Liquor and Gaming Authority in 2016. These decisions are reviewed with regard to the Authority's duty to consider social impacts. The review identifies processes and patterns of decision-making that favour the applicant, demonstrate inconsistencies, fail to use health statistics, misinterpret other statistics, make inconsistent use of reputable health research findings and treat legal obligations as mitigations. The cumulative effect is a low refusal rate. Of 168 applications, 15 were refused. Review and appeal for objectors have been severely restricted in NSW.